4 ms·
That’s essentially what __future__ imports are for – things that go further would be simply too much work and Python 3 was about shedding weight, not shipping e
by hynek 14y ago
That’s essentially what __future__ imports are for – things that go further would be simply too much work and Python 3 was about shedding weight, not shipping essentially two interpreters. (while they are very similar from outside, the innards couldn’t be more different)
- lrem 14y agoCool. So this way porting things to Py3k got easier. That perfectly explains why all the critical libs have been ported fast and no one remembers about Python 2 anymore, doesn't it? Shedding weight is sometimes a step in a good direction. But we need to draw a line at some point. As the history of Python 3 adoption shows, that point maybe was not optimal. Edit: forgot an angle: Also, __future__ is fixing the incompatibility of what people are using with something that they can't use. I'm not sure if it's the right problem to solve.
- hynek 14y agoAs it has been pointed out for several times: the adoption of Python 3 is doing just fine. It has never been expected that everybody will be using Python 3 today. But look at all those current efforts at Canonical, Django, Twisted…it’s not like nothing is happening and we expect a knot to burst. Far from it! Porting started slowly and has gained a momentum by now that has surprised myself. It’s not like we changed the language completely like perl6 did. In the result, we’ll have a better Python for it.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ash 14y agoWell, you can't do this: from __future__ import python3 (via http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/python3 http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/python3)